Posted
by
Unknown Lamer
on Wednesday December 21, 2011 @11:18AM
from the bug-fixes-are-nice dept.

jfruhlinger writes "The Kindle Fire and Barnes and Noble Nook tablets are similar enough and close enough together in price that they ought to be fighting market share and one-upping each other in terms of features they offer users. But the latest OS upgrades to both gadgets claims to be an 'upgrade' while actually taking functionality away: both remove the ability to root the device."
A more balanced way of looking at it is that the updates fix known local privilege escalation vulnerabilities. This might be more of an issue for people wanting to hack on the Nook Tablet: its bootloader is confirmed locked, but reports lean toward the Kindle Fire having an unlocked bootloader letting anyone flash their own software without needing to gain root first.

The unlocked bootloader means that on the Fire, this is at most a small speedbump in the process of modifying a device. However this prevents malware from gaining privilege escalation. (Most of the easiest Android rooting techniques like psneuter and rageagainstthecage relied on exploits that could and WERE also used by malware such as Droid Dream.)

But in this analogy, you'd be allowed inside the cabin because it's the expected and normal usage of the car - you don't generally change/upgrade things from within the cabin beyond those the manufacturer/dealer approves (IE: swapping out a radio is pretty simple on most cars and doesn't usually void warranties). To "lock the cabin" of a tablet would be like the update changing the password/PIN and not letting the user in at all.

And yet if the car companies removed your hood release and required a special key or tool only available at the dealerships, you'd be screaming bloody murder and so would the mechanic's unions with good reason - in fact, several times there were class action lawsuits against GM, Ford, and Toyota due to their refusal to sell the appropriate adapters and codebooks necessary to troubleshoot or reset "check engine lights" and computer warnings to the 3rd-party mechanic shops.

Imagine if the car companies wanted to take away your RIGHT to have your car fitted out with a turbocharger, or an aftermarket performance chip [servicemix.org], or a better flywheel [americanmuscle.com], or any number of other changes.

Now why is it that people don't scream bloody murder when they have a computing device in their hand, personal property they purchase, and they're told "but you don't have admin rights to change anything so there"???

This is a pretty pathetic analogy, and yet dopes still mark it insightful. Amazing.

A car has a hood release for a very simple reason: the manufacturer REQUIRES you to perform regular checks and services under the hood. There are plenty of places in a car where the manufacturer does NOT make it easy to get to (under the dash, for instance), because in normal use (as intended by the manufacturer) there is simply no need to do that. There are other things in a car which require destruction of parts of the

And yet if the car companies removed your hood release and required a special key or tool only available at the dealerships, you'd be screaming bloody murder and so would the mechanic's unions with good reason - in fact, several times there were class action lawsuits against GM, Ford, and Toyota due to their refusal to sell the appropriate adapters and codebooks necessary to troubleshoot or reset "check engine lights" and computer warnings to the 3rd-party mechanic shops.

Yeah, let's weld the bugger shut, so that nobody, including the imaginary bad guy can get in. And if you need to change the oil then just buy a new and upgraded car, that will come with brand new oil.

It's that or you will have droves of flaming fanboys chanting "android cars don't get oil changes in a timely manner even though it doesnt impact performance at all!" and "my iThing gets oil changes every other week whether i like it or not; and yes i like it!"

Why we can't just leave the device details up to the manufacturers and pick our devices based on the features and benefits they offer is beyond me. Some people just love to drown in minutia, personally I would rather buy something that works, return

Much better car analogy: some car manufacturer comes out with a model where, if you hit the driver's door with your hand in the right place, the door unlocks. Lots of people buy the car and enjoy it, since you don't need to carry the keys around with you. Then the car manufacturer fixes the fault, and many people cry foul. Everyone misses the point that it is a generally bad idea to allow criminals to trivially get in to your car, and that locks are a *good* thing.

The issue is if someone opens the hood in their car and says replaces their oil with anti-freeze or does something stupid, the automotive industry is mature enough to tell the user that what they did was wrong and will cost them an arm and a leg to get it fixed. And the end user will not get too much sympathy on the internet for doing such a stupid thing. However for these consumer devices if someone who really doesn't know what they are doing roots their device then does something stupid, they will post

The reason they are preventing you from rooting has nothing to do with whether you do something stupid to the device and post nasty comments on the net. As you point out, nobody cares what you do to a laptop or desktop. The only reason they want to prevent root access is so their content isn't copied. They make all of their money selling books, apps, etc. This is why the Microsoft eBook Reader app failed. No publisher wants to put their content on a PC, they will only put it on a closed device.

Yeah, seriously. When you have a security flaw that allows root privilege escalation you don't just decide not to fix that because the homebrewer's were using it as a convenient way to get access to the machine. If this was on an (open) desktop platform, such a flaw wouldn't really be tolerated for long.

It's like when people are upset that an exploit in a game was fixed that people were using to win / get free stuf / etc, yet they don't get upset when a bug is fixed that was actually preventing them from completing a game.

If this was on an (open) desktop platform, such a flaw wouldn't really be tolerated for long.

Which is why the user should simply be given root access to begin with. Instead of having to use privilege escalation attacks, users should just be able to hit a button or flip a switch to enable root access for themselves. Quick, easy, and perhaps voiding the warranty (but I think anyone who wants root access is willing to have no warranty).

Bingo. One can just look at the Nexus line of devices and the "fastboot oem unlock" command and the warning given as the right way to go about doing this. This is enough of a hurdle to keep Joe Sixpack from doing it so he can see the dancing bunnies, but allows people who are willing to trash their device (and not bother calling hardware support) to do what they feel free to.

Once I've bought the thing it's no longer "their stuff", it's now MY stuff and I should be able to do what I want with it. If they agree to provide support for a certain time period as part of the purchase contract I would expect that the support will **NOT** break MY tablet. If it does (and isn't simply a mistake or incompetence) then they're not keeping their part of the deal.

For the obligatory car analogy . . . If GM sells you a car and throws in a year of free oil changes and tune ups, would you be

If GM sells you a car and throws in a year of free oil changes and tune ups, would you be a bit annoyed if during one of the oil changes they also installed a governor that prevented you from driving faster than 50 kph?

Of course that car will not need another oil change because it's going to be completely destroyed in a cataclysmic road rage accident.

No matter how 'trivial' you perceive it to be, it is still expense. They not only have to provide the hardware and develop the software to support it, they also have to test it. Warranty costs will rise as idiots brick their devices and return them as defective. Support costs will rise as each call takes longer when it includes an attempt at recovery. Customers will get pissed at having to attempt recovery on a broken device.

A friend of mine had a Kindle that failed recently. They called Amazon, and af

Welcome to the real world, the property you own isn't yours.You're not buying a product any more you're buying a service. You can't lend others your books (look in the copyright notice at the front if you doubt me) You can't

It is not your music, it is licensed from those who own it.Oh you're a band and think you own your music? Nope, it belongs to your record label.Oh you're not signed to a record label? Since 7 notes is enough to copyright a riff then that gives you just over 5000 original works of music so there is no original works anymore. You cannot produce your own works of art anymore.

Okay maybe you have an idea for a cool new machine, nope that's almost certainly covered by someone else's vague patent. Your ideas aren't yours.

Okay what about your house, I bet it's mortgaged so the bank owns it.Oh, you own your house outright, fine but who enforces it? When someone tries to take it from you it's a government giving you a licence to live there as long as you pay property taxes.

Actually you know what I started writing this as a parody post and now I'm not sure anymore, exactly what do we own anyway? What has anyone ever owned? Did those 200 years ago have more property rights than we currently have?Moving forwards should we have more property rights? Should I be allowed to sell you a device that is designed to break, or at least rely on updates to keep doing the same job? Machinery has always worn out, selling with a contract that requires a service contract has always been legal (AFAIK) so why are we annoyed about this now?

You can't lend others your books (look in the copyright notice at the front if you doubt me)

"No part of this book shall be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher."

"transmitted by any means.... mechanical"

How do I get it home from the store? Did Amazon violate the copyright when they shipped it to me?

Once a copyright owner has authorized the making and distribution of a particular product embodying a copyrighted work or patented invention within the United States, the exclusive distribution right is considered "exhausted", and further distribution of the same product within the United States is not an infringement of copyright. For copyrights, see 17 USC 109; for patents, see Keeler v. Standard Folding Bed Co., 157 U.S. 659, 666–67 (1895). The only exception for copyrighted works is when a for-pro

You think every bookstore that mails or delivers books has written agreements with every publisher? Amazon was just an example; the logic applies to anyone who mechanically transmits* a work.

*I think the other two child posts are more to the point. 1) Mechanical Transmission doesn't mean physically shipping/giving/lending (see: libraries). 2) Copyright law is more nuanced than the boilerplate on a book's title page.

No, the answer is that copyright doesn't grant all the privileges the publishers are claiming, at least in the USA. In particular, the Doctrine of First Sale pretty much says that you can legally do whatever you want with your copy once they've sold it to you (aside from using it to make more copies). That includes not only obvious things like transportation, but also lending—both free/personal loans and commercial rental.

Rental companies and retailers often do have special agreements with the publishers, but that's because the publishers are offering them a better deal, not because they need the agreement simply to resell or rent out the physical books/DVDs/etc.

Digital media falls into a rather gray area, which is how the publishers like it. They take advantage of the ephemeral nature of digital goods to undermine the First Sale doctrine, while simultaneously claiming that the content has been fixed in a tangible medium in order to gain copyright privileges over it. It should be one or the other, but they leverage the confusion to get their way on both counts.

That's the problem for any form of property. As John Philpot Curran (not Jefferson, as commonly thought [wikiquote.org]) pointed out, the price of liberty "is eternal vigilance."

Should I be allowed to sell you a device that is designed to break, or at least rely on updates to keep doing the same job?

As long as you make this clear in advance. The problem comes when advertising does not mention restrictions on a device or buries them in a page of legalese. For example, where on a video game console's box does the manufacturer mention the restrictions on who qualifies to develop games for the platform?

I own that copy of it. And copyright doesn't give them any power over what I do with that copy except within a very limited scope relating primarily to distributing additional copies.

If I buy a copy of Lord of the Rings, then I own that copy. I can pee on it. I can cut it into pieces and rearrange the pages. I can white out the word Frodo and put my dogs name in its place. I can cut out the section with tom bomadill and burn it. I can write a sex scene be

If it's Windoze, an unfixed privilege escalation exploit leads to Slashdotters calling Microsoft out as a shoddy company. When Amazon fixes the same type of security issue, they are accused of crushing homebrew development. Let's face it... security bugs should be fixed.

Homebrew is only related in that it's using security flaws to root the device. If Amazon wants to support homebrew, they should do it in a way that doesn't compromise the current OS. Not leaving security bugs where anyone can take over

I'm just annoyed that they have not implemented all of Gingerbread. They claim they have Android 2.3.4 on kernel 2.6.37 and yet they don't support the ADK (accessory development kit). It's just a couple of already written classes in the kernel, a framework jar, and a permissions file. It would take an hour to implement and 3 to test. Hook us up Amazon! Then I wouldn't even want to root the thing.

Thanks for the heads up but I've done C++ for the last 15 years. A C struct is NOT the same as a C++ struct because it can't inherit and it doesn't have methods , only the option of function pointers, but thanks for playing.

C can't do proper OO classes so there are precisely zero in the linux kernel. Sure you can use structs and mangle something together with function pointers to simulate methods and varargs to knock up some hideous facsimile of polymorphism , but good luck with inheritence. As for having various auto constructors/destructors.... yeah well...

Wrt learning CS, I already had a CS degree while you were still dribbling babyfood over your dads 486.

C can't do proper OO style classes so there are precisely zero in the linux kernel. Some function pointers to mimic methods and some hideous varags mashup to create a facsimile of polymorphism does not create a proper class. As for inheritence and auto constructors & destructors , good luck!

Wrt to learningCS , I had a CS degree while you were probably still dribbling babyfood over your dads 486 sonny.

Get those that cheap "shanzai" tablets from China. They come with pretty good hardware and quite a few already have ICS firmware released. Best of all, you need not worry about not being able to root the tablet.

Are they certified by Google? If not, then what market do they come with?

They come with pretty good hardware

Does "pretty good hardware" include a capacitive digitizer so that 1. I can run applications that require Android Market, and 2. I don't have to either borrow my DS's stylus or press so hard I feel like I'm running the risk of breaking it?

Are they certified by Google? If not, then what market do they come with?

Almost all are not, but there are some exceptions, e.g. MIPS-based Ainol Novo 7 is Google certified (running ICS) and costs around 100$

Does "pretty good hardware" include a capacitive digitizer so that 1. I can run applications that require Android Market, and 2. I don't have to either borrow my DS's stylus or press so hard I feel like I'm running the risk of breaking it?

Yes, most 100$+ tablets are using capacitive 5-point multitouch screens. Their resolution is usually quite low though, but it's going to change soon - there are several new 7" tablets with 1024x600 resolution.

So how do I convince the publisher of an application that uses the NDK to offer a MIPS version of the same application? I haven't yet had a chance to try a MIPS tablet for myself, but I'm under the impression that the view of Android Market on such a tablet would be as barren as, say, the AppsLib that comes on eighth-generation Archos devices because most apps using the NDK are exclusive to ARM and th

A few minutes on slatedroid, half an hour of effort and your favorite Chinese tablet is running the full market. And please don't tell me time is money, your mere presence here proves otherwise.

So how do I convince the publisher of an application that uses the NDK to offer a MIPS version of the same application? I haven't yet had a chance to try a MIPS tablet for myself, but I'm under the impression that the view of Android Market on such a tablet would be as barren as, say, the AppsLib that comes on eighth-generation Archos devices because most apps using the NDK are exclusive to ARM and thus hidden.

I never recommended buying a MIPS tablet, just answered your certification question. Though I guess for basic uses like web browsing, it should be fine.

(Aside: Has my "trying to find the best affordable Android tablet" become "whining" yet? Should I stop now?)

I would say yes. Though it looks to me like you are trying to convince yourself not to grab one of these 100$ tablets. Good luck with that, it's not easy. I failed 3 times:)

Android apps written exclusively for Android or ported from Java ME are usually written in 100% pure Java. Android apps ported from other platforms will more often use the NDK because as I understand it, the Dalvik virtual machine can't run C++.

Since the last update to the Nook Color let me watch Netflix (it works really well, although subtitles could be slightly larger) and fixed a few oversights like not being able to read books in landscape mode, I really don't have a reason to root it anymore. It may just be my perception, but overall performance seems to have improved slightly as well. Does anyone know if this affects dual-booting the Nook Color off of a microSD card?

Both the Nook Color and Nook Tablet will try to boot off microSD first if they can. That's not part of the OS. However, the Nook Tablet requires a signed kernel to boot, and the Nook Color does not. So, this change results in a significant loss of hackability for the Nook Tablet, since you had to "jailbreak" it in some sense to do anything. It does not result in a significant loss of hackability for the older Nook Color, since you can still just write an unsigned kernel to a microSD card and you're off and running.

Disclaimer: this is my understanding from scouring the xda-dev forums for details and from hacking my own Nook Color. I've confirmed that 1.4.1 on the Nook Color does close the sideloading "hole", and that a 1.4.1 Nook Color will still boot stuff like CM7.1 from microSD card. The rest of it, I have not personally verified myself, but am summarizing my understanding from reading experts talking about it all.

First off, is anyone surprised? As a business, I'm making sure:
1) That people don't try to return the product when they screw it up doing something that the product wasn't intended to do (and it costs me money)
2) That I eliminate a potential attack vector for malware which would lead to decreased sales and increased returns (which costs me money)
3) That people are locked into using my products (which makes me money)

This is all about the money people. This isn't about trying to screw over the 0.1% of people who buy the tablet - It's about maximizing the profits. And let's be realistic here - they will be recracked in short order.

That people don't try to return the product when they screw it up doing something that the product wasn't intended to do

It is a computer, not a hammer. Since when do we declare that a computer is "not intended" to do something in software? If people were complaining that their Nook could not solve the Post correspondence problem, you would have a point.

That people don't try to return the product when they screw it up doing something that the product wasn't intended to do

It is a computer, not a hammer. Since when do we declare that a computer is "not intended" to do something in software? If people were complaining that their Nook could not solve the Post correspondence problem, you would have a point.

Neither company advertises there reader as anything but a reader designed to run their software. Just because it was capable of being rooted doesn't mean they have to continue to allow it to be rooted or that they are taking anything away. You are free to buy someone else's product or not upgrade yours and live with the capabilities and limitations of the current setup.

You are still also free to try to root the device or otherwise modify it - but neither company has any obligation to make it easy to do that

They modified their software so it only does things they want it to. They did not modify the so-called computer. If you want to pretend a Kindle is a general-purpose computer, then treat it like one. Only load your own software and software you trust. You have zero reasonable expectation that the software provided by Amazon (or anyone else) will do or be usable for anything other than what they say.

The Kindle Fire is a 7-inch tablet that links seamlessly with Amazon's impressive collection ofdigital music, video, magazine, and book services in one easy-to-use package. It boasts a greatWeb browser, and its curated Android app store includes most of the big must-have apps(such as Netflix, Pandora, and Hulu)

and

Additional email apps are available in our Amazon Appstore for Android.

Everything just about is a computer or has a computer in it.That is where things get fuzzy. Should you have the ability to change the software on all of them. Take cars for example. They have lots of computers. Lots of people will reprogram the ECM but what about the CPU that controls the anitlock brakes?I am all for the hacking of devices but I can see the manufactures point of view. They made a devices that does xyz and sells it as doing xyz. They never told you that you could root it.At least the Fire a

Lots of people will reprogram the ECM but what about the CPU that controls the anitlock brakes?

As long as they do not make their vehicle unsafe for the road, why would that be a problem? We require cars to pass inspection for this reason. Why should someone be forbidden from hacking their brakes?

Why should a company be forced to make it easy for someone to hack their brakes?

But more to the point, you aren't forbidden from hacking your brakes/tablet. I mean, was a law passed that expressly forbids the hacking of tablets and other hardware you own? Like someone said earlier, this is the company making a decision about their product because of how it affects their bottom line. Amazon isn't selling Fires at a loss so hackers can get a piece of cheap hardware to do whatever they want with it. They a

There is no legal or ethical justification to force [Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo] to use an open game format.

If you don't agree with the restrictions on a Nook Tablet, you can always buy an Archos 80 G9 instead. But there are no competing video game console makers that use open formats. So if Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo conspire to forbid a particular game from appearing on any console, why isn't that predatory refusal to deal [ftc.gov]?

That people don't try to return the product when they screw it up doing something that the product wasn't intended to do (and it costs me money)

The proper way to fix this isn't to block all rooting but to provide a working recovery means to reset the operating system to factory state, restore applications from the market, and restore the user's data from automatic backup. Then figure out a way to segregate the user's data so that it doesn't have to be restored as often; the "/sdcard" partition in some Android devices has worked well for this.

That I eliminate a potential attack vector for malware

You can't neutralize malware without first defining malware. This involves enumerating the possible bad things that malicious software can do. Does this list of bad things [laptop.org] miss anything?

That people don't try to return the product when they screw it up doing something that the product wasn't intended to do (and it costs me money)

The proper way to fix this isn't to block all rooting but to provide a working recovery means to reset the operating system to factory state, restore applications from the market, and restore the user's data from automatic backup. Then figure out a way to segregate the user's data so that it doesn't have to be restored as often; the "/sdcard" partition in some Android devices has worked well for this.

If you want to start a company to create a hobbyist tablet that is safe for rooting and experimentation, you should go ahead. But don't expect Amazon (or B&N) to sell a tablet designed to sell their own content while at the same time supporting your desire to run a different operating system on it.

They are selling it at close to the manufacturing cost (or possibly below cost) because they are counting on it to bring in revenue. B&N doesn't want you rooting it and installing the Kindle App, or vice-v

It's like we live in a world where there are two kinds of vehicles. Everyone either drives a enclosed electric golf cart, which is a good pollution-less short-range cheap vehicle, or a gas-powered car, which is more expensive but has a 300 mile range and is much faster and can carry more.

And then vendors inexplicably start selling cars as 'gas powered golf cars', in the golf cart market. They've crippled these cars so they only have a range of

One of the ideas in the story was not proposed in reality until 2002. This is the idea that the FBI and Microsoft will keep the root passwords for your personal computers, and not let you have them.

The proponents of this scheme have given it names such as “trusted computing” and “Palladium”. We call it “treacherous computing”...

The 1997 prediction, proposed in 2002, is reality in 2011. The big surprise is that the implementation isn't a technical DRM/TC scheme, but a fundamental change in corporations retaining ownership and control of items after they've been sold. Who could have predicted that?

That would be prophetic... if it wasn't for the fact that DVD players at that time already had private keys kept away from their owners and that the current generation of games consoles at that time were also locked down.

Trusted Computing? Despite people like him getting hysterical about it, it still remains a feature designed for businesses who can turn it on if they wish to have the added security it provides, not something ever designed for consumer use.

There are a number of exposure vectors for stuff like this. Certainly the average user does not want something that they buy/download to gain additional privileges and do unexpected things. Anything that makes that less likely is going to be required.

I believe these devices are WiFi only and do not have a great deal of radio power, but you can believe anything with a cell radio in it is going to be locked down as tightly as necessary to absolutely prevent changing radio parameters. The first hacker that gets into a cell radio and shows the world how they can disrupt cell communications in their corner of the world will prove the need for this kind of lockdown beyond any doubt. But I don't see how this would apply to these devices.

Certainly both devices are sold either at a loss or at a very, very thin margin with the expectation that they will be used to buy stuff from the parent company and mostly the parent company. Overall, Amazon has been quite generous with the Kindle line - supporting the 3G wireless access for web browsing, email reading, etc. Yes, you can download non-Amazon books through the Amazon-supported wireless access. I suspect with the Fire the capabilities are there to access free and paid content outside of Amazon, but the Amazon stuff is easier to get to. I have no idea what sort of capabilities the Nook has, but I am guessing both have NetFlix access just as an example. So the devices aren't really "owned" by their parent but the expectation that there will be future profits affect the price of the devices. Similar devices are normally priced a bit higher - as much as 50%.

I do not think the parent "subsidy" is the reason for the lockdown as to the average consumer they are no more locked down now than before. If you can still pay NetFlix and watch movies on the device, then it isn't locked to only Amazon or B&N content.

I think the only explanation that is reasonable is the absolute very last thing they want is any sort of downloaded software making its way onto one of these devices and taking it over. Anything that prevents that or makes it less likely is going get pushed out to the user community. Anyone criticizing this doesn't understand the risks or the incredible backlash that would follow from an exploit on one of these devices.

Lockdown is fine, but when the lockdown puts the owner of the device in jail then it's crossing the line.

you can believe anything with a cell radio in it is going to be locked down as tightly as necessary to absolutely prevent changing radio parameters.

Baseband radios tend to be locked down yes. But there's no need for the application processor environment (android, etc.) does not need to be locked down beyond necessary security features. Well, no need beyond pro-corporate BS and control.

Which affordable, certified "real Android tablet" in the 7 to 8 inch range do you recommend instead of a Kindle Fire or Nook Tablet? Or are Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet like game consoles, sold at razor-thin margins or even at a loss to get people onto the manufacturer's store, and that's why they're so much cheaper than Google-certified devices?

I have several FlyTouch pads from China. The new ones are dual touch with 1ghz processors in a 7" format and are running around 80$ including shipping. They are google Android and they will send you the android image. Re-flashing is as easy as putting the image on an sd card and booting the unit with the sd card in it.

Not the greatest in the world but they are very good for around the house network access, book reading, hacking, etc.

Which affordable, certified "real Android tablet" in the 7 to 8 inch range do you recommend instead of a Kindle Fire or Nook Tablet? Or are Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet like game consoles, sold at razor-thin margins or even at a loss to get people onto the manufacturer's store, and that's why they're so much cheaper than Google-certified devices?

They're coming [androidpolice.com]. Of course if you're absolutely desperate for a tablet from a brand then $200-250 is probably the best you can hope for right now. But I expect next year the market will be flooded with tablets from $100 up running Ice Cream Sandwich or its successor.

What is the relevance of an affordable, certified "real Android tablet" to the Kindle Fire or the Nook? Just because there isn't a product on the market that satisfies your desire to not pay anything doesn't mean that Amazon and B&N have to satisfy your thriftiness by opening up their tablets.

Absolutely right. If B&N and Amazon want to sell you hardware that you don't 'own' in the traditional sense, there is nothing forcing you to buy it.

It's a classic troll like those from the dawn of internet trolling, alt.religion.kibology circa 1993. Ah, the good old days of cross-posting about "Majel Barrett Shatner" and "the fifth Beable", both to the appropriate newsgroup for the show, and a.r.k for the audience.

I bought the NC because I could get it cheaper than the Kindle Fire and the reviews for the Fire said it was crap.

You made a mistake relying on bad reviews written by morons. I've looked at a lot of them. They're mostly immature Apple fanbois trashing the competition and/or ignorant "tech journalists" who are cutting and pasting other peoples' reviews. 90% of what you see on tech blogs is pure plagiarism with a lame excuse link buried at the bottom.

The truth is that the Kindle Fire is a really pleasant device, a great bargain, well-supported by Amazon (three OS updates so far) and with the 6.2.1 OS, quite snappy.

I have a Fire, and my daughter has the Nook Color. In terms of performance, responsiveness and usability, the Kindle is head and shoulders above the Color (which is last year's model). A much faster dual-core CPU is the biggest reason, but the display is also much brighter. The Nook Tablet, which is about $50 more, is arguably better hardware, but it's more limited on the media and software side. Both support Netflix. The Fire has more apps and the Amazon music and video, which is important if you are a Prime member but maybe not all that big a deal otherwise. The Fire lacks SD card support and has no microphone like the Nook Tablet.

For books, the Nook Android software is easily obtained and sideloaded on the Kindle Fire without rooting, so you have a choice. I'm not so sure that can be done the other way around.

The Kindle Fire 6.2.1 upgrade wipes and reconfigures the Android/system partition. This is an easy way to do the upgrade, but if you rooted your Fire in order to install the Google app framework, you'll suddenly discover that calendar and contact sync has gone away. Most of the other Google software works without requiring rooting, and it's simple to pull a backup off your Android phone that can be installed on the Kindle Fire.

The culprit here isn't Amazon, but rather Google, which is responsible for making its apps unavailable on the KF platform and for requiring that its application components be installed on the system partition. The only way to make the system partition writeable is to root the device.

There are some parts of the Fire UI that needed some work; the carousel in particular was jerky and not always responsive. That's fixed in 6.2.1. I also see reports that the Kindle Fire doesn't like flaky, crappy wifi routers (and there are a LOT of crap routers out there). I don't know how much of that might be fixed in the upgrade. My routers all work fine.